MDA, SMDC chiefs say U.S. doesn't need additional missile site on East Coast

A ground-based missile interceptor is lowered into its missile silo during a recent emplacement at the Missile Defense Complex at Fort Greely, Alaska. (Contributed photo/U.S. Army)

Two military officers who lead U.S. missile defense efforts
said there is "no validated military requirement" to construct a Ground Base Interceptor site on the East Coast, despite claims by lawmakers that failure to do
so leaves the country vulnerable to attacks from Iran.

Vice Adm. James Syring, director of the Missile Defense
Agency, and Lt. Gen. Richard Formica, commander of the U.S. Army Space and
Missile Defense Command/Army Forces Strategic Command and Joint Functional
Command - Integrated Missile Defense at Redstone Arsenal, were asked by Sen.
Carl Levin, D-Mich., to give their opinions on the proposed site. Levin is chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Levin's letter comes after the House Armed Services Committee voted
to provide $140 million towards the establishment of the East Coast missile site as
part of its 2014 Defense Authorization bill. The matter was voted down in the
Senate last year and faces a tough battle again during the new budget debate.
The East Coast site - expected to cost at least $3 billion once complete - also
faces opposition from the White House which is opting to put its focus on
additional Ground Based Interceptor sites at Ft. Greely, Alaska.

Those 14 additional sites are designed to protect against an
increasingly belligerent North Korea. Plans call for the $1 billion project to
be in place by the fall of 2017.

Alternatives most cost-effective, military officials say

In Levin's June 6 letter, Syring and Formica are asked if they
favor Congress moving ahead with funding the East Coast site before
environmental assessments identify its best location.

The two answered "no."

They were also asked if they believed there was a more cost
effective and less expensive alternative that could be deployed to the East
Coast sooner than the proposed GBIs.

"Yes," Syring and Formica wrote. "Investment in Ballistic
Missile Defense System, or BMDS, discrimination and sensor capabilities would
result in more cost-effective near-term improvements to homeland missile
defense. "

Syring, who is based in Ft. Belvoir, Va. and oversees MDA's
operations at Redstone Arsenal, and Formica said the Pentagon is in the process
of enhancing sensors to increase threat detection.

"While a potential East Coast site would add operational
capability it would also come at significant materiel development and service
sustainment cost," they wrote.

The Senate Armed Services Committee is expected to debate
the full defense bill today.